Topper wrote:UW, your take on the defensive play of the role players is very good and is why they are especially frustrating to play against. Being out muscled is one thing, but being out thought is far more frustrating. Just ask Reef. I still miss the physical play of the younger Burrows and Kesler.

I feel like I am being slagged here but not quite sure ....

I may be a different here but for some reason I thought the Sedins would do better with the limited preseason and no preseason games. They are in such good shape and can do things with the puck like no other that they would be ripping apart the opposing teams D. NOT SAYING they are doing bad just saying if there were a couple players who could of used the odd start to this years season to really pad some points it would of been those 2.

Reefer2 wrote:
I may be a different here but for some reason I thought the Sedins would do better with the limited preseason and no preseason games. They are in such good shape and can do things with the puck like no other that they would be ripping apart the opposing teams D. NOT SAYING they are doing bad just saying if there were a couple players who could of used the odd start to this years season to really pad some points it would of been those 2.

You're right in that the Sedins are in fantastic shape and that shows.

However, the reason it may take them a little longer to get going is because of how precise their game can be.

I'll use a golf analogy, when you start playing again after a long layoff the toughest part of your game to get back is the fine detailed movements (ie. your short game). The chipping, putting, bunker shots!

The Sedins success revolves around the fine details in hockey, the tape-to-tape passes, the backhand saucer passes just out of reach of the defender where the Canucks will get to it first, etc. This type of game requires precise timing and execution that can only be mastered during game action because of the speed difference between games and practice. They need some game time to get back in the groove because of their style of play.

You can see that it's coming back to them and we will see a game or two very shortly where the Sedins put up 3 or 4 points a piece, don't worry.

Reefer2 wrote:
I may be a different here but for some reason I thought the Sedins would do better with the limited preseason and no preseason games. They are in such good shape and can do things with the puck like no other that they would be ripping apart the opposing teams D. NOT SAYING they are doing bad just saying if there were a couple players who could of used the odd start to this years season to really pad some points it would of been those 2.

You're right in that the Sedins are in fantastic shape and that shows.

However, the reason it may take them a little longer to get going is because of how precise their game can be.

I'll use a golf analogy, when you start playing again after a long layoff the toughest part of your game to get back is the fine detailed movements (ie. your short game). The chipping, putting, bunker shots!

The Sedins success revolves around the fine details in hockey, the tape-to-tape passes, the backhand saucer passes just out of reach of the defender where the Canucks will get to it first, etc. This type of game requires precise timing and execution that can only be mastered during game action because of the speed difference between games and practice. They need some game time to get back in the groove because of their style of play.

You can see that it's coming back to them and we will see a game or two very shortly where the Sedins put up 3 or 4 points a piece, don't worry.

UWSaint wrote:Alexander Edler is not Ed Jovanovski. While he has made more mistakes than a first pairing guy should, his mistakes are not chicken-with-head-cut-off-variety (the kind of panic-leads-to-poor-positioning that Ballard and sometimes Bieksa have in the past displayed (but less so this year)) and are not the result of recklessness on offense (his offense is exceptional, but not the reult of high-risk plays). They are usually due to an inability to settle the puck, leading to a weak pass or the failure to hold the puck in. Bottom line, I don't know that these flaws will ever leave Edler, but they are identifiable and workable.

Astute summation UW. Though I disagree with some of what I've quoted here.

While you are right, Edler is not Jovanovski, and he has indeed made more mistakes that a top 2 should make etc, I disagree with your analysis that it has simply been due to an inability to settle the puck or failure to hold the puck in. While those are often the reasons for his foul ups on the PP that lead to a shorthanded rush or need for the team to regroup, his screw ups on the Canuck's side of center are a different story. I'll go back as far as the series against the Kings last year. He was routinely caught forgetting about a man behind him who put in an uncontested back door pass or rebound, his passes out of the zone were brutal, the puck has often gone up the middle from behind his own goal-line only to be picked off before it hits the blueline.....scoring chance ensues. I still see plenty of this from him this year. His physical tools and mobility are quite good for someone with his size, he seems to forget that he has these assets at times. When I heard a few games back that he had gone 3 games without throwing a single hit I almost couldn't believe it.

Settling the puck quickly and making the smart play is one of the skills that I associate with players who truly excel in this league.....at any level to be honest. The guy who doesn't have to waste a precious extra half-second getting the puck under control before letting it go has a serious edge. Dangling and fast feet be damned, if you can move the puck quickly with precision you will score more, setup more, and frustrate checking opponents more.

I suppose if Edler didn't have the flaws he has he would have been looking at a contract in the $6M range rather than the $5 he received. I just don't want to see this team go the way they did with Mattias Ohlund again. A good player. Very solid top 3 defender, but one who just wasn't up to the task of being a number 1 guy, he's not a Shea Weber or Chris Pronger. Gillis needs to be ready to pull the trigger on a deal that includes Edler if it has the chance of strengthening the team in the long run. We kept Ohlund until his trade value was next to nil (or so we thought).....I don't think anyone saw the offer from Tampa coming back then. I don't want to see another massive overpayment or commitment to a player who is good, but not good enough to fill the role that coaching, management, and fans, expect him to fill.

I still maintain that Gillis should have gone HARD after Weber's rights last off-season. I think Weber would have signed a more "reasonable" deal outside of Nashville after Suter had left town. It would have been worth giving up Edler, parts, and picks. But what's done is done.

Aaronp18 wrote:
You're right in that the Sedins are in fantastic shape and that shows.

However, the reason it may take them a little longer to get going is because of how precise their game can be.

Yup, the twins train hard, but there's nothing like *playing* to get your game going.

All the Canucks who actually *played* during the lockout had great starts to the season.

Ballard, Tanev, Raymond, Weise, Schroeder, Hansen, Kassian.

All except Ebbett, but he's an temporary emergency replacement at best in the NHL amirite.

Raymond only played for like 2 weeks before the lockout was resolved. Maybe that's why it took him a full game to actually get going.

I didn't realize Hansen had played overseas, but you are right. I think that has been the case with every team. Many of unexpected the hot starts from teams expected to round out the bottom half of the standings was due to having more players in top game form.....no idea what happened in Washington though.

Strangelove wrote:Yeah, he's the next best thing to having an able-to-step-right-in doesn't-need-waivers rookie in the A.

Like Schroeder is right now!

When Kess comes back and we get a veteran tweener centre back in the Lou deal we can risk Ebbett on waivers

... and send Schroeder down til the trade deadline.

*braces for attacks from Schroeder-lovers*

Ok Doc, don't take this as an attack from a "Schroeder-lover".

Just wanna know why you say until the trade deadline?

If you are thinking to bring him up and use him as trade bait.....actually that can't be it.....if you want to use a rookie as trade bait you showcase him as best as you can.

I don't like the idea of having him in the AHL and then coming back up so close to season's end. If he's forced to fill in at that point he won't have played or practiced with the big club for as much as 2 months. I think better to keep Schroeder up with the Canucks and risk Ebbett on waivers, if Schroeder has to sit and watch more from the press-box, well so be it, at least he's practicing and in the mix with these guys on a daily basis.

Aaronp18 wrote:
Some have also complained about the coaching staff's inability to make adjustments to the opposition. I've always hated this argument because when the Canucks are successful they are the ones dictating the play and forcing the opponent to adjust, as you mentioned. As soon as the Canucks get off their game plan (whether it be due to injuries, fatigue or simply uninspired play) is when they get into real trouble.

This complaint would be mine.....

While part of what you say is true, sometimes the Canucks are going to run into a team where the Vancouver gameplan is not going to work. It is no different than when teams run into Vancouver and cannot get their gameplan to work. Simple strategy really.

Defensively you will not get an argument from me regarding Vigneault, he knows how to coach a team to buy into that system and stymie the opponent in the neutral zone while, for the most part, keeping them to the outside in the defensive zone.

Offensively is a different story, and this is where adjustments need to be made.....and this holds true for any team and coach.

When your playbook has been read by the opponent, and they setup wall, sometimes you just can't keep throwing bodies at it. Sometimes you have to come at it from a different angle. I don't understand why some people seem to think that you can make the other guy play your game if you just stick with it.

Boston and LA were more than happy to let the Canucks play Vigneault's gameplan, they just setup against it and waited for the Canucks to do exactly what they expected them to do. The result was a complete inability for the Canucks to score at their usual pace. Yes, injuries played part. But why was an uber talented team like Vancouver completely incapable of replicating the success of a team like Tampa Bay from just a week or so before? It had nothing to do with Boston altering their gameplan, I watched both series. The Bolt's just exposed the weaknesses in Boston's defense and goaltender. Limited mobility, slow feet, and Thomas way out of his net and screwed on the weakside rebound or cross ice one-timer. Vancouver didn't even try to do this. Watch the Canucks first PP unit tonight, or next game you watch. The Sedins move up and down the wall, but nobody else really moves around. PK's just have to setup in the passing lanes and not bite on the puck carrier. Gameover. PP dead. 2 minutes of wasted time. Zero motion. Sure, the PP works against some teams, the ones that play a little more high risk and try to pressure the puck carrier into a turnover. Henrik is too deft a passer not to beat that half the time, but if you just sit back and don't give him or Daniel a pass, well they just have to go back to the corner or to the point.....and everyone knows our pointmen can't hit the broad side of a barn 90% of the time.

Defensive gameplans will always be something that you try and keep fairly static.....if they are solid and well thought out. Vigneault's certainly are. Offense and attack are things you adjust to try and make your opponent either change his defensive strategy or expose the weakness and make him pay for not adjusting.